MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Delay in Delivery of Handicraft Goods by Kuwait Airways

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld compensation awarded for the delay in the delivery of consignments of handicraft goods by Kuwait Airways. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Prashant Kumar Mishra, addresses a consumer dispute brought by M/S. Rajasthan Art Emporium against the airline.

The case revolved around the appellant, an exporter of handicraft goods, who had sent shipments to the USA, specifically to M/s. Williams Sonoma Inc. The shipments were meant to be delivered urgently, with a specified delivery schedule. However, the consignments did not reach their destination in Memphis, USA, as per the schedule, causing significant delays.

The appellant filed a complaint seeking compensation for the loss of business and reputation, as well as damages for the delay in delivering the goods. Initially, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) awarded compensation for the loss of goods, but the matter was appealed, leading to a reconsideration of the delay issue.

The NCDRC ultimately awarded compensation for the delay in delivering the consignment, taking into account the weight of the goods and relevant provisions of the Carriage by Air Act, 1972. The appellant, however, sought a larger compensation amount.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court upheld the NCDRC's decision on compensation, emphasizing the onus on the airline to prove that its agent had no authority to provide the delivery schedule. The Court also noted that the appellant's claim was limited to the amount initially sought in the complaint.

The ruling sets an important precedent for consumer disputes related to delayed deliveries and highlights the significance of adherence to delivery schedules in commercial transactions.

"Once the agent has issued a time schedule for delivery of consignment, it cannot be said that there is no material indicating that there was no agreement for delivery of the consignment in time," observed the Supreme Court.

The decision reaffirms the importance of timely delivery in business transactions and underscores the liability of carriers for damages occasioned by delay in the carriage of goods.

This ruling serves as a reminder of the legal remedies available to consumers in cases of delayed deliveries and sets a clear precedent for compensation in such situations.

Date of Decision: 09 November 2023

M/S. RAJASTHAN ART EMPORIUM  VS KUWAIT AIRWAYS & ANR. 

Latest Legal News